This is a great question and we chalk up the nuance as being a matter of 'ego' vs. 'conviction'. This is what we feel seperates a great analyst/investor from the rest. It is being able to differentiate having conviction in an asset and holding through volatility, vs. simply not willing to change one's opinion upon the release of new information (ego).
TRI is a high-quality company, with solid fundamentals, that previously traded at a premium due to its high-quality nature, excellent track record, and good management team. But, narratives, new information, and technological advances can alter these facts. The key is in separating noise from signal.
We do not feel that Claude will simply disrupt every software-adjacent business, but we cannot dismiss the rapid potential for certain software businesses to be leap-frogged. Because TRI operates in areas with a lot of regulatory requirements, we feel that its disruption risks are relatively low, but not all of its businesses will be immune. But, there is also the potential for TRI to develop in-house AI solutions that are more affordable and can compete with more lean AI entrants.
Forward sales and earnings estimates continue to trend mostly higher, and if we begin to see TRI discuss parts of its business losing market share, or analyst estimates begin trending lower, or larger adoption of software that is coming out of Claude begin to take place, then we would adjust our framework on TRI. But for now, we view this sell off as mostly being investors exhibiting a 'fire, ready, aim' framework with software stocks.